New Claims Stir Controversy Over 2024 Trump Assassination Attempt
Just when many thought the details of the 2024 Trump assassination attempt were fully examined, new claims have emerged that could reshape the story.
Prominent commentator Tucker Carlson alleges that the FBI covered up key evidence—evidence that, if true, raises serious questions about how federal authorities monitored a known threat. The bureau’s denials have only intensified public scrutiny.
The FBI officially pushed back against Carlson’s assertions, rejecting his claim that the bureau “lied” about Thomas Crooks, the 20-year-old gunman who attempted to assassinate President Trump in Butler, Pennsylvania, on July 13, 2024.
Carlson alleged that the FBI had previously stated Crooks had “no online footprint” and promised to release evidence showing otherwise. The FBI Rapid Response account on X clarified: “This FBI has never said Thomas Crooks had no online footprint. Ever.” The account, launched in November 2025 and followed by Director Kash Patel and other top officials, seeks to counter misinformation in real time.
Tucker Carlson’s bombshell reporting confirms what everyone has been suspecting for years: Federal officials knew who Thomas Crooks was prior to Butler and that he harbored a deep hatred for Trump with the intent to take him out.
— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 14, 2025
Was Thomas Crooks groomed by dark MKUltra-level… pic.twitter.com/jyd7VxoLh9
Crooks fired eight rounds from an AR-15-style rifle while on a nearby rooftop, killing one bystander, injuring two others, and grazing Trump’s ear. A Secret Service Counter Sniper Team member returned fire, killing Crooks within seconds. The shooting exposed serious security gaps, prompting the resignation of Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle. An independent review later concluded the agency required “fundamental reform.”
Who is Thomas Crooks? pic.twitter.com/WwjvPGGRwS
— Tucker Carlson (@TuckerCarlson) November 14, 2025
Carlson posted a 35-minute video claiming to reveal previously unseen footage and evidence, including Crooks’ alleged activity across platforms like Gmail, Snapchat, Venmo, Zelle, Discord, Google Play, Quizlet, Chess.com, and Quora. He argued that these accounts contradicted supposed FBI statements about Crooks’ online presence. The FBI insists no such claim was made.
Conclusion
The dispute highlights ongoing tension over transparency, communication, and the handling of politically sensitive cases. While the FBI maintains it never misrepresented Crooks’ online activity, Carlson’s release fuels debate, underscoring the challenge of separating verified facts from narrative-driven interpretations in an age of instant information.